JL is completely correct that PB has long sequences of wins, win streaks. I just had my simulation break out win streaks and display them. At 100 sessions at a time it's easy to see that long win streaks are very common. I just had 33 wins in a row on a 100 session test. That test produced a 6.7 to 1 hit rate. I also had two 25+ win streaks in a 100 session test that produced a 9 to 1 hit rate. It's not a verification or validation of PB but more it's a validation that PB can look like a winner in the short run but that it will always be a loser in the long run. 6,400 is not a large number sample.

Let's take this over the top to where it does work. You can track for the elusive Elegant Pattern without a chart. If you can count then you already have the skills to find trends in these groupings. Here it is:
0,00,10,20,30 - 1,11,21,31 - 2,12,22,32 - 3,13,23,33 - ... 9,19,29

Sometimes just three of the ten groups go on the rampage as a dominance. You can see it in the Marquee without the need for a chart. When it's real good just two groups hit. You also get three groups sleeping. If you keep your eyes open the Roulette table can become your very own temporary ATM machine.

I have not attempted to master imbalance correction. I went another direction from the very start. I watched 12 numbers, on the inside, almost go to sleep for 4 1/2 hours on four different tables. My instincts were to bet for a correction. I lost my pay check that night. This, and one other momentous event, while playing Roulette, put me on to the discovery of randomness. That was twenty years ago. I just had my first taste of the global effect. It comes in big and small sizes. It can give you evidence that there is also a trend that acts like a bigger picture. Like a force that has an over all effect, all be it, a temporary effect. These global effect trends can work for you because they help you to see deeper into a second layer of things that just happen to be continuing. When they are present, balance correction is almost impossible. It is for that reason that I prefer to look at randomness without regards to when statistical balance occurs.

Attacking the possible seven way on a single doz/col.

If you see three in a row:
Bet 60 units for the repeat. On win take off 90 - net 30+
Variation on this is to also bet 30 on one of the other doz/col.
at this point all next bets are already paid.
On fifth repeat take off 90
On sixth repeat take off 270
On seventh repeat take off 810

The very best way to attack a possible seven in a row is to place a bet for the fourth spin. That bet needs to pay you in full for the rest that is left behind for the let it ride bets. You need a bet for each step. So you pull off the payer bet that makes the rest of the bets free. That is at step four in a row. that means you will pull off a bet that one twice, three times, and four times if you reach all seven in a row. After that first win it's all profit. So the remaining bets get pulled one at a time for each step. The last one rides for four full steps if it makes it.

6,000 spins

Wins = 5,298
Losses = 702
Double Losses = 78
Triple Losses = 9
Strike Rate = 7.55

I'm almost done trying to be helpful. I'm programming my simulation to test 6,000 sessions. I think I can get a few of them to finish off far above the expected statistical probability. I'll report those results without comment. Then I'm done.

That first picture of spins, 3,0,12,8,6,12,16,20,3,12,5,27,30,3,33,19,28, there's an 11 spin sleeper in the 1'st column. There's a 9 spin sleeper in the high dozen. There's an incredibly awesome dominance of the top column. It even includes a seven in a row. You can kill that with a side bet on a let-it-ride. An in depth betting method makes for interesting reading. It's all about knowing when to attack with different techniques that best fit the conditions you see.

I'd look for that too. I also look for absence of singles,  or a global effect where dominance goes on a trend of swapping dominances. Try to pick up on any patterns occurring. Look for sleeping zeros. Try to find trends.

LOL All you can do is laugh.

This is exactly the conditions that you attack. It's easy to see this in the red/black chart. Its not easy to see the trends in the doz/col chart here. I keep a chart for every section of the outside bets. They look the same as the red/black chart here. You can see patterns, singles, dominance, and sleepers easily.

How to see and attack the basic occurrences of dominations.

It is not uncommon to see 45 reds and 15 blacks in 60 consecutive spins. If you just flat bet red you are going to win at a three to one rate. The unit result is +30. If you have a properly formed chart you can look at it and see the dominance of red numbers in less than 1 second. If you can't see that then you are using the wrong kind of charts.

You should be able to detect the beginnings of a well formed dominance within 7 to 10 spins. So you begin to bet the dominant even-chance occurring opportunity found in your chart. As long as it continues, You get further ahead.

Dominances are very seldom the same. Sometimes the weak side is peppered with singles and sometimes the weak side is peppered with an absence of singles. You can attack this absence of singles while also sticking to your win streak on the dominant side. 

Are there any questions yet?

Quote from: JohnLegend on November 28, 2012, 01:29:26 PM
Giz that's not what we are talking about here. A method that delivers 10/1--12/1 playing for pennies. Suddenly starts delivering 6/1 playing for Euros. Im giving them the benefit of the doubt.

That proof I provided, that you so easily dismissed, had a stretch of ten sessions, at hit and run tactics, that dropped to a 2.3 / 1 hit rate. When you get normal randomness results like that you might want to consider that it's just part and parcel of the game and not some casino targeting you with some cheating conspiracy.

Quote from: spike on November 28, 2012, 04:30:17 AM
How do you know it's a winning streak? Please
give an example to illustrate what you mean.

Don't ask me Spike. ALL OF YOUR POSTS ALWAYS BEGIN WITH A POLITE QUESTION. AND ALL OF YOUR POSTS ARE ALWAYS DIRECTED AT ME. YOU ARE AN INTERNET TROLL THAT DIRECTS ALL YOUR ACTIVITY AT ATTACKING ME. PLEASE GO AWAY. THIS IS A FORUM THAT HAS NOT BEEN DISRUPTED BY YOU. (YET)

Spike - "You are my project, Gizmo. I never talk about roulette anymore. I only post when I see you post, because you're so full of stuff, such a fraud and con man, and I detest you so completely, I've made it my goal to harass and expose you wherever you try and sell you're stinking nonsense. You have nothing that beats roulette, you never will have anything."

I don't think that BV cheated anyone. I think that fundamentalist Pattern Breaker players came up with another magical explanation for another normal random occurrence.